TrueCombat
http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/

SPECOPS objectives
http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=651
Page 2 of 2

Author:  Melmoth [ Mon May 08, 2006 6:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

kozak6 wrote:
I believe they said that they will utilize dead SpecOps for the VIP, and that if there aren't any, the SpecOps win simply because the Terrorists haven't been doing their job.


True. I remember that.

Author:  Dragonathan [ Mon May 08, 2006 7:05 pm ]
Post subject: 

kozak6 wrote:
Multiple objectives sounds good, but I wonder if it might be too much work for SpecOps if they are restricted to one life.


4 objectives,

now i suggest that there should be 4 people carrying "1" C4,

all the 4 C4's should be planted on 4 generators, the C4's will only be activated when all the C4's are planted,

the time limit before all the C4's gonna explode is about 3 minutes,

Author:  Silentcrisis [ Mon May 08, 2006 7:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

But if one of the people carrying the C4 is killed, then it's pretty much mission failure unless someone else picks up the C4 from his fallen comrade.

And is every map going to have, conveniently, a generator?

You have completely forgotten about the Terrorists. They should have a chance to attack instead of just constantly defending like they do now in the Objective mode currently implemented. (Or I could have that backwards for I play BC mode other than Objective.)

~Silentcrisis

Author:  XenoKiLLer [ Mon May 08, 2006 8:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

America's Army is multiobjective most of the time and yet one life seems to be enough. Maybe make the defensive side underpowered and under armed.

Author:  kozak6 [ Tue May 09, 2006 2:49 am ]
Post subject: 

But that would be incredibly frustrating, and no one would ever want to play defense.

I must confess to being ignorant of how multiple objectives are handled in AA. I don't know if you remember, but I didn't exactly enjoy it very much.

Author:  XenoKiLLer [ Tue May 09, 2006 10:46 am ]
Post subject: 

I knew that.

The thing is, AA also has maps where both sides are fighting over the same objective instead of having assault and defense. It will be somethnig like extraction or viprescue/kidnap or something similar.

Author:  it [ Tue May 09, 2006 2:54 pm ]
Post subject: 

XenoKiLLer wrote:
I knew that.

The thing is, AA also has maps where both sides are fighting over the same objective instead of having assault and defense. It will be somethnig like extraction or viprescue/kidnap or something similar.

works for me.


I like the idea of both teams needing to do stuff, and only meeting about halfway (i.e., blow a door/wall/whatever, then run to the obj, repeated on both sides)

once VIP and CTF come out, I am taking a BC break :P.

that or when I get me, chis and his buddy together for a wuick match :P

Author:  XenoKiLLer [ Tue May 09, 2006 9:32 pm ]
Post subject: 

We'll all probably see each other in CTF. But TCE would be alot beter if it also had mission based objectives not just blow up a crate.

Author:  mondayriot [ Tue May 09, 2006 10:03 pm ]
Post subject: 

I've always enjoyed the missions in which you must follow and defend a vehicle moving along a set path. It's fun for both sides: the attackers because setting ambushes are fun, the defenders because you have to stay on your toes. It could be as simple as a VIP in a truck or something along those lines.

Author:  Silentcrisis [ Tue May 09, 2006 10:09 pm ]
Post subject: 

Hmm... an Idea I just had in terms of playing mode.

How hard would it be to allow 3rd party mappers to create multiple objective maps, such as those in ET?`

~Silentcrisis

Author:  XenoKiLLer [ Tue May 09, 2006 10:15 pm ]
Post subject: 

Hmm. I think the ET code for understanding multi objective maps still exists. If it is not in TCE it is still in the base code of ET. The mappers just need to know how to access that part of the code to enable it but it might require them to use unpure servers for 049.


(BTW General section has been cleaned of most 2005 threads)

Page 2 of 2 All times are UTC
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/